Skip to main content
Glama

mindbody

Add a client

mindbody_add_client
Destructive

Create a new client record (first and last name required; the site may require more — Mindbody reports which). No card or billing data is accepted. Pass test: true to validate only. Mindbody: POST /client/addclient.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
cityNoCity.
testNoWhen true, Mindbody validates the request but commits nothing. Use it to dry-run a write.
emailNoEmail address.
stateNoState / region.
genderNoGender, as configured at the site (see the site's genders).
countryNoCountry.
last_nameYesLast name.
birth_dateNoDate of birth, ISO 8601 (e.g. 1990-04-12).
first_nameYesFirst name.
home_phoneNoHome phone number.
work_phoneNoWork phone number.
is_prospectNoMark the client as a prospect (only if the site allows prospects).
middle_nameNoMiddle name.
postal_codeNoPostal code.
referred_byNoHow the client was referred (one of the site's referral types).
mobile_phoneNoMobile phone number.
address_line_1NoStreet address, line 1.
address_line_2NoStreet address, line 2.
send_account_emailsNoOpt in/out of account notification emails.
send_schedule_emailsNoOpt in/out of schedule notification emails.
send_promotional_emailsNoOpt in/out of promotional emails.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior5/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations only carry destructiveHint, so the description does the heavy lifting: it discloses that required fields are site-dependent and reported by Mindbody, that no card/billing data is accepted, and that test: true commits nothing. That is meaningful behavioral context an agent cannot infer from structured fields.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Three compact sentences, front-loaded with the core action and requirement, then the data restriction, then the dry-run and endpoint. No filler sentences.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given 21 parameters, no output schema, and thin annotations, the description covers the critical creation constraints and dry-run behavior well. Its one gap is not hinting at what a successful call returns (e.g., the new client identifier).

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so all 21 parameters are already documented, including the test flag's dry-run semantics. The description reinforces the required fields and the no-billing-data constraint but adds little parameter detail beyond the schema; baseline 3 applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb+resource ('Create a new client record') and is clearly separable from siblings like mindbody_update_client, mindbody_list_clients, and mindbody_add_client_to_class. It also names the underlying endpoint, removing any ambiguity about the operation.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Gives actionable context: first/last name are required, the site may demand more, and test: true performs a validate-only dry run. It does not explicitly compare against mindbody_update_client or state when *not* to use this tool, so it stops short of the top tier.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.